School Annual Programme Monitoring Report 2012/13
(Annex E: Code of Practice for Research Programmes)
1. Number of research students covered by the report (and breakdown into year groups)
New registrations
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Intermitting
Writing up
Submitted
Totals
LLM
3
3
1
2
3
12
MPhil
1
3
4
PhD
14
3
13
11
9
4
3
10
7
74
2. Report on the induction, probation, end of year, submission and continuation year reviews which have taken place during the last academic year. This should include statistics and a commentary on completion rates within the school.
Induction
Probation
Upgrading
End of Year 1
End of Year 2
End of Year 3
Submission
Continuation
16
16
1
0
7*
1
12
4
Our efforts to improve completion rates have met with some success, though the data are skewed by a handful of students who, for one reason or another are able to go over 4 years.
*Reviews have been conducted and portfolios submitted, although we are experiencing some difficulty in getting online reports completed.
3. A commentary on the School’s consideration of student feedback (obtained via annual reports, progression reviews, postgraduate student representatives, staff-student liaison committees and the postgraduate research student survey) and an indication of actions already taken and planned as a result of this feedback.
The feedback from the PGRes staff-student liaison committee has been very positive and we endeavour to act quickly to institute improvements where we can. For instance we have responded to calls for improved training (see below at 8). As our community has grown the demands on infrastructure have become more obvious as we reach our carrying capacity. We anticipate that this will be =come a major issue if we grow much further.
The 2013 PGRes feedback was very positive and overall represented a situation that we can be proud of. The data were broadly in line with those from other years, but
Code of Practice for Quality Assurance for Research Programmes
School Annual Monitoring Template: Annex E
July 2013

with significant percentage (7-35%) improvements over 2012 in all categories except just two (requirements and deadlines for monitoring -10%, and supervisor knowledge and skills -4%). Because the total number of respondents was 32 (of 55) it is difficult to generalise from data on specific elements with any reliability since the effect of a small number of respondents can make a relatively large change to the percentage figures. However together they do suggest that our response to last year’s feedback by improving working space, computer and library provision (up 35%, 13% and 7% respectively) may have been recognised by the students. Overall these feedback scores were also very favourable in comparison with those for the wider sector as a whole and by sub-category, being well ahead vs the HE sector, the Russell Group, the 1984 group, and both the Pre and Post 92 groups. This was most notable in respect to ‘resources’, our ‘research culture’, ‘responsibilities’ and research skills and development’. Only in some categories under the collective title ‘Opportunities’ did we perform less well than our competitors – essentially ‘submitting paper for publication’ and ‘communicating your research to a non-academic audience’. This is certainly an area that we are looking at for improvement during 2013/14.
4. Information about the standard of learning resources for postgraduate researchers
KLS can pride itself in the learning resources it provides to its PGR students, whether through the wealth of printed texts held in the library, electronically accessed materials, or the manifold learning opportunities provided through participation in the
PGR community. For those PGR students also operating in the role of TA, this also includes participation in the PGCHE run by the UELT, with all the associated resources it provides.
5. A commentary on the quality of the research environment available to postgraduate researchers within the School.
KLS offers an excellent research environment for it PGR students, both in terms of the infrastructure and the academic environment it provides. This includes the
Postgraduate Study Group, visiting academic master-classes, student/staff seminars, and participation in the KLS research centres, together with the support it offers in the form of an annual research/conference allowance.
6. A report on the adequacy of research skills training for postgraduate research students within the School.
The skills training offered in-house, through the Graduate School, and via the SE-
DTC, together with support given to students to attend approved training at other HE institutions, provide a wide-ranging and comprehensive basic and specialised training for our PGR students. In addition, financial support is given for students to attend approved training at other HE institutions.
7. A report on the School’s consideration of feedback obtained from external examiners.
There has been no specific feedback received for external examiners. All those who have been involved in acting in this role have given positive feedback about how the process has been conducted.
8. A commentary on any developments or enhancements made to the programme over the last year.
Code of Practice for Quality Assurance for Research Programmes
School Annual Monitoring Template: Annex E
July 2013

In response to students’ comment via the staff-student liaison committee, in 2013 we introduced ‘surgeries’ to students in which they are given one-to-one advice on the empirical research elements of their projects.
9. Comments from supervisory staff on the availability and appropriateness of staff training opportunities, including (where appropriate) the identification of areas shortfall in the University’s provision in this area.
We have received no specific comments from supervisory staff on this matter. The system of 1 st and 2 nd or shared supervisors combined with a supervisory chair where necessary, seems to be working well. Training is available through UELT to those staff wishing to undertake it and all supervising staff are made aware of these opportunities.
10. Statistical data on applications and admissions to the programme(s) with a commentary on whether or not this indicates that the programmes(s) are able to recruit satisfactorily.
LLM
MPhil
PhD
Totals
Applications
20
2
197
219
Registrations
3
0
14
17
Applications to our PGR programmes remain healthy and continue to rise. The proportion converted into registrations is low, but it is in line with the pattern we have seen over the past years and does not differ from that experienced by other Schools.
11. Any matters raised with respect to disabled access to the curriculum (care should be taken not to identify individual students).
None
12. Any proposed changes to the programme(s) and any implications for resources and staff development of such changes.
None
Code of Practice for Quality Assurance for Research Programmes
School Annual Monitoring Template: Annex E
July 2013